2014 AFB ConventionTemple Grandin Perspectives

[76 Bar]

Excellent commentary.

 

http://www.farms.com/expertscommentary/video-dr-temple-grandin-s-tough-message-at-the-american-farm-bureau-convention-86583.aspx#.VLrSrhHkA3E.facebook

[Sue R]

Thank you for posting this.

[juliepoudrier]

I hope producers (Big Ag, because I think small producers pretty much already understand) take her words to heart.

 

I had NO idea that dairy cattle are generally good for only two lactations. What a waste.

 

J.

[Mark Billadeau]

It comes down to if enough consumers are willing to pay extra in order to keep lower milk producing cows through more lactation cycles.

[juliepoudrier]

Oh I understand the economic reasons; it just seems a strange paradigm to create animals who are useful for two years (or three months of you're a broiler chicken). That doesn't seem sustainable to me, genetically, especially for larger animals. I thought her comments on the AI studbooks were interesting. Talk about taking functionality to a single trait, or just a few. Scary.

[Sue R]

About dairy cows, after investing in a heifer for two years (birth to first freshening), you would think that keeping her healthy and productive at least for her peak productive lactations (and I'd guess through age 6 or 7 or so), would be most economical. I guess not any more. I think it's a shame.

 

I do remember back when I was a DHIA tester, that I did a high-producing farm. I did not care for some aspects of his management (like tail docking) but he did maintain a top-producing herd. One of his very best producers, with several years left of her most productive years, had an abscess on the surface of her udder. If she had been one of my goats, I'd have injected that with a mastitis treatment, withheld the mild for the four days (fed it to baby heifers), and kept her in production. He found it too much trouble and shipped her - young, productive, and with what I considered a minor health issue easily dealt with.

 

I think there is too much economic pressure on commercial (make a living from) farmers to allow them to treat animals the way I'd like to see animals treated. And then there's the pressure from the large conglomerates, both on their producers and on smaller-scale producers.

 

We almost went into dairying back 40 years ago. We've both been glad ever since that we did not.

[Gideon's girl]

I thought I read that because of "mad cow" cattle over the age of 3 are not supposed to enter the human food chain. If that is so, then that would be another reason they limit milk cows to 2 seasons.

[Sue R]

No, cattle of older age can certainly "enter the food chain" but must have the spinal column removed along with the brain as neither the brain nor the spinal cord can be consumed. This rule applies to older cattle, those that can't walk, and those that exhibit neurological symptoms.

 

The only documented cases of people in the US who have been diagnosed with this (variant CJD) and died from it appear to have eaten meat outside the US. Only a very few head of cattle have been diagnosed here in the US and most if not all were imported (Canada). More people develop Classic CJD (spontaneous in humans), 1-2 per million, than get it from consumption of infected animals.

 

What really is the limiting factor on the productive life of dairy cows is that they are rarely pastured any more but are kept in confinement and/or dry lot on concrete for most if not all of the year. They just do not hold up under those conditions compared to cattle that have access to pasture and natural movement along with a more natural diet. Contributing to that is breeding for milk production at the expense of breeding for longevity.

[Gideon's girl]

Thanks for the explanation!

[76 Bar]

Glad to oblige Sue and I appreciate your additional comments on this thread and especially regarding your experience with the dairy industry. My area has historically (turn of the 20th century) been a niche for grass based dairying. Steins rule but Jersey's still enormously popular. Comparatively tiny foot print on our 60-70 inches of annual precipitation.

Not to be contentious, but my top peeves are sweeping generalizations and political correctness. Universally painting so-called “Big Ag” as evil/negative and “small producers” as virtuous is patently erroneous and short sighted.

As Grandin said, she’s worked (for decades with, ahem, Big Ag) slaughter plants (North American and globally) and achieved superlative results for all concerned. Long story short, to do otherwise would be fiscally imprudent for the major players.

Like everything in life, nothing in is cut and dried, pardon the pun.

The term “small producer” conjures up warm and fuzzy feelings amongst the great unwashed in spite of the fact that by all accounts, a definitive description is sorely lacking. One thing is certain…the term assuredly isn’t a guarantee that "small producers" have a lock on properly managed livestock.

 

Single trait selection is unequivocally a recipe for disaster. The dairy industry is a classic example and the results are directly attributable to the long-standing acceptance of two +/- lactation average stability world wide.

 

On another note, Grandin voiced her current concerns regarding structural ie foot conformation issues in beef cattle. Interestingly, seedstock breeders have been chasing a plethora of (multiple) performance traits since god was young. Unfortunately, at the expense of soundness which has been thrown under the bus.

 

No cattle born and raised in the USA have tested positive for BSE. Which is yet another enormously compelling reason to support COOL.

 

Mark…I'm not sure I comprehend your thoughts…please elaborate.

[76 Bar]

Geeesh…apologies for all the typo & grammatical errors…carry on.

[Liz P]

I said the same thing, that the dairy industry was heading in the wrong direction and not sustainable IMHO. Many dairy cows only make it through one lactation. How is this acceptable? I made someone very angry with my views. He was looking at hard numbers, more milk from fewer cows, as proof that science and selective breeding had improved the industry.

 

Small and local certainly is no guarantee of better conditions for the animals. I've seen this first hand.

[Sue R]

You are correct that painting with a broad brush over simplifies matters and is not correct in many cases but in general, I think the perception of the trends are basically valid.

[Mark Billadeau]

Mark…I'm not sure I comprehend your thoughts…please elaborate.

 

If consumers are only willing to spend so much for a gal of milk, producers are limited of how high their production costs per gal of milk can get before it is no longer economical for them to stay in business. Then producers must increase milk production and/or reduce production costs.

 

We have a local grass based dairy/creamery near us that distributes (home delivery) to the DC metro area. While they are doing well I also hear from many who used to be customers that they can't justify the higher prices for milk they cannot tell is any different than what is available in the grocery store.

[Maxi]

It's a difficult time worldwide for the dairy sector.

 

In the UK, the number of dairy farmers has dipped to under 10,000 ( from over 20.000 in 2001).

 

The cost that you can buy milk in the UK is cheaper than bottled water..and the amount that many farmers are paid for their milk is now well below than the cost of production. In fact last week, one of the main milk buyers withheld payment because of cash flow problems.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jan/12/dairy-farmers-go-unpaid-milk-becomes-cheaper-than-water

[juliepoudrier]

Oh sheesh, pardon my generalizations. My sincere apologies for using the terms "Big Ag" and "small producers." I'm not an idiot--I do know that there are terrible small producers and wonderful large producers, but I stand by my belief that corporate farms (that is, farms run by large corporations who look at *only* or *mainly* the bottom line with little oversight over how the actual people doing the work get there) are more likely to drive the problems mentioned here (cattle that can produce milk for just two years and are shipped to slaughterhouses in very poor condition, cattle who break down after a couple of years, bulls with crappy conformation who would never be able to get the job done out in the pasture, sows who don't get along--which Temple noted can be fixed simply by choosing the correct genetics).

 

Smaller farmers (whether warm and fuzzy or not) have more of their personal time and income invested in their stock and so, IMO (and at least in MY experience) can't as easily treat their stock as commodities to be used up and traded out in the space of just a couple of years. Most of the small producers I know (including myself) try to get the most out of their stock for the longest time feasible. They (we) select for hardiness and longevity, which seems to be the opposite of what Grandin described for corporate producers. But apparently I'm completely misguided about that.

 

I didn't hear Grandin mention small producers at all, and the problems she focused on seemed to be directly related to large producers (call them what you will) trying to eke the maximum profit with the least input. To her credit (and it's why I like her) she's willing to point out to those very producers how they are screwing up, especially in the realm of public opinion.

 

MY OPINION.

 

J.

[geonni banner]

I think public perception of Big Ag is closely tied to monoculture. Vast vistas in which only one plant species can be seen. It is thought by many that the small farmer will have various species of plants and animals on their farms - and thereby creating a more "natural" environment.

 

Of course the reality is often quite different, and though it is very pleasant to imagine a farm as a place where chickens and ducks wander freely about a farmyard, small orchard and vegetable garden, and the plowing is done with a team of Belgians or at least a little "fordson" tractor, it is not that way in more than a handful of small farms. (How's that for a chewy sentence?) And of course, even among those, some are more skillfully managed than others.

 

But these types of farms are frequently meant to sustain only one family. Feeding a nation this way is impractical. Of course the main problem - the root problem - is that there are simply too many of us. If there were less humans to feed, all sorts of problems would be solved.

 

I personally am willing to pay more money - quite a bit more money - for food from sustainably and humanely raised crops and livestock. I consider it perfectly acceptable to live without cable and a smart phone in order to make such food fit in my budget. But I am well aware that the majority of my countrymen are not. More's the pity.

 

I'm not a humaniac. I train with a choke-chain, and expect my dog to do what she's told - when she's told. I eat meat and eggs. But I don't eat pork or poultry because I do not have a source that meets with my standards for husbandry. I pay eleven dollars a dozen for eggs because I do have a source for real free-range eggs.

 

I once read an interview with a grass-fed cattle rancher who said, "My cattle have a good life with one really bad day at the end of it."

 

An oversimplification, but I get what he meant. All animals die, and the worst deaths are not always in a slaughterhouse, thanks to the efforts of Ms. Grandin and others. It's how they live that mostly concerns me. Most poultry and swine are raised in conditions I consider unethical. If poultry slaughter was held to the same ethical requirements as cattle and sheep I would happily eat them. But it is not. So I don't.

 

I spent part of my childhood on a farm something like the family farm described above. I have raised and killed chickens, squab, ducks and rabbits. We also had a few hogs and leased grazing to horses and cattle. Our sows were not confined in farrowing crates. And "our" cows were not finished in feedlots. Their deaths were quick and relatively free of pain and terror. This is perhaps why I set the bar so high for husbandry standards.